W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2006

Re: [css21] height: [percent]

From: Andrew Fedoniouk <news@terrainformatica.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 12:05:54 -0800
Message-ID: <00b001c64222$8ae48070$c302000a@internal.toppro.net>
To: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "Ignacio Javier" <ijavier@efenet.com>, <www-style@w3.org>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch>
To: "Andrew Fedoniouk" <news@terrainformatica.com>
Cc: "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>; "Ignacio Javier" <ijavier@efenet.com>; 
<www-style@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 11:41 AM
Subject: Re: [css21] height: [percent]


|
| On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Andrew Fedoniouk wrote:
| >
| > "If the pixel density of the output device is very different from that
| > of a typical computer display, the user agent should rescale pixel
| > values. It is recommended that the reference pixel be the visual angle
| > of one pixel on a device with a pixel density of 96dpi and a distance
| > from the reader of an arm's length."
| >
| > As you may see such rescaling is not a mandatory.
|
| It is mandatory unless the implementor has a good reason not to do it.
| What good reason would that be?
|

To be able to define hairlines for example.

"nWidth [in] Specifies the width of the pen, in logical units.
If nWidth is zero, the pen is a single pixel wide, regardless of the current 
transformation."

Src: 
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/gdi/pens_9wha.asp


|
| > And probably it is better to replace 150px by something more reliable
| > like 10cm ?
|
| 150px is the de facto standard.

Standard of what? Could you provide some example?

Andrew Fedoniouk.
http://terrainformatica.com
Received on Tuesday, 7 March 2006 20:06:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:44 GMT